Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34609322›Full record

ArticleJMIR perioperative medicine2021

Predicting Prolonged Apnea During Nurse-Administered Procedural Sedation: Machine Learning Study.

Aaron Conway, Carla R Jungquist, Kristina Chang, Navpreet Kamboj, Joanna Sutherland, Sebastian Mafeld, Matteo Parotto

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR perioperative medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Decoding machine learning in nursing research: A scoping review of effective algorithms.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Aaron ConwayLawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9583-8636
Carla R JungquistSchool of Nursing, The University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4248-1098
Kristina ChangPeter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8987-3427
Navpreet KambojLawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6500-0456
Joanna SutherlandRural Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Coffs Harbour, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7302-6963
Sebastian MafeldJoint Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9248-7589
Matteo ParottoDepartment of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1165-4264
Toronto General Hospital · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · USUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCapnography is commonly used for nurse-administered procedural sedation. Distinguishing between capnography waveform abnormalities that signal the need for clinical intervention for an event and those that do not indicate the need for intervention is essential for the successful implementation of this technology into practice. It is possible that capnography alarm management may be improved by using machine learning to create a "smart alarm" that can alert clinicians to apneic events that are predicted to be prolonged.

objectiveTo determine the accuracy of machine learning models for predicting at the 15-second time point if apnea will be prolonged (ie, apnea that persists for >30 seconds).

methodsA secondary analysis of an observational study was conducted. We selected several candidate models to evaluate, including a random forest model, generalized linear model (logistic regression), least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, ridge regression, and the XGBoost model. Out-of-sample accuracy of the models was calculated using 10-fold cross-validation. The net benefit decision analytic measure was used to assist with deciding whether using the models in practice would lead to better outcomes on average than using the current default capnography alarm management strategies. The default strategies are the aggressive approach, in which an alarm is triggered after brief periods of apnea (typically 15 seconds) and the conservative approach, in which an alarm is triggered for only prolonged periods of apnea (typically >30 seconds).

resultsA total of 384 apneic events longer than 15 seconds were observed in 61 of the 102 patients (59.8%) who participated in the observational study. Nearly half of the apneic events (180/384, 46.9%) were prolonged. The random forest model performed the best in terms of discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.66) and calibration. The net benefit associated with the random forest model exceeded that associated with the aggressive strategy but was lower than that associated with the conservative strategy.

conclusionsDecision curve analysis indicated that using a random forest model would lead to a better outcome for capnography alarm management than using an aggressive strategy in which alarms are triggered after 15 seconds of apnea. The model would not be superior to the conservative strategy in which alarms are only triggered after 30 seconds.

Indexed as

anaesthesiaanesthesiaapneaapnoeacapnographyconscious sedationinformaticsmachine learningmedical informaticsnursingpatient safetyprocedural sedation and analgesiasedationsleep apnea

Identifiers

PMID34609322
PMCPMC8527383
OpenAlexW3196259627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.